We have not increased prices, we will do so now
News: Public car park rates to rise in first revision after 14 years
The parking rates at all public car parks are set to be raised following an ongoing government review of both short-term and season parking schemes.
The price revision will be the first in 14 years.
The Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) told TODAY that the aim of the review is to "reduce the gap between the fees charged by private and public car parks" and appropriately price "public car park charges".
"Since (2002), the costs of managing and operating car parks have increased substantially," the URA spokesperson added. "This is reflected in the current fees charged by most private car parks, which are substantially higher than public car parks."
The Housing Development Board (HDB), which manages most of the public car park spaces (about 607,000 lots), is also studying parking schemes as part of its regular policy review.
"While car park charges have not changed since 2002, the provisions within old and new HDB car parks have evolved and improved over the years, to bring convenience to residents," said a spokesperson for HDB.
She cites improvements like better-designed car parks with landscaped decks, the implementation of the Electronic Parking System and the addition of lifts at multi-storey car parks where feasible.
In addition to the revision of car park charges, the HDB is looking to put in place differentiated parking charges for non-residents who use HDB car parks, and those who require multiple parking lots because they own more than one car. This is so that the parking demand can be better managed, with priority accorded to the parking needs of residents’ primary car, the spokesperson said.
The review came two months after National Development Minister Lawrence Wong said in Parliament that his Ministry may have to look at raising car park charges if Singapore wants to move in the direction of a car-lite society.
The amount of increase will be announced when the review concludes, the URA spokesperson said.
I'm a proponent of expensive parking. However, my guess is that the rates will increase by a "mere" 20%.
It is also time to have dynamic rates at EPS carparks:
| %age | 30 min |
|---|---|
| <20% | $0.50 |
| <40% | $0.75 |
| <60% | $1.00 |
| <80% | $1.50 |
| >=80% | $2.00 |
(The rate will be updated every minute.)
One set of rates will work everywhere: CBD and non-CBD, peak and off-peak, day and night. There is no artifical distinction, just based purely by demand.
How about season parking? IMO, it should have a bidding system, just like COE. It is to everyone's advantage to bid $1, but when supply exceeds demand, either none of them get it (just like COE today), or they will be be randomly allocated. Unlike COE, the unused bids cannot be brought forward.
For people who don't get the season pass, they have to pay the prevailing daily rate — $300/month today — hence everyone has an incentive to bid what they can afford to avoid this worst-case scenario.
In other words, a natural equilibrium-finding mechanism. I won't be Mr Popular. :lol:
Bidding for season parking won't work as well as COE, though, due to a natural cap of $300 for an unlimited season pass that allows parking at all HDB carparks. It will rise to be inline with the new rates, but it won't be much, say $360. What happens if everyone is willing to pay that amount and a carpark is still oversubscribed?
One solution is to set the daily rate based on the season parking rate if the latter is higher. If season parking costs $500/month, the daily rate is $16.67.
I definitely won't be Mr Popular.
Note that if the above rates are used, the daily rate should be $15 to $30, so the unlimited monthly season pass will be $450 to $900!
Game disrupter for Lego
The Cafe Corner costed US$139.99 new. It has been discontinued in 2009 and now costs well over US$1,500 for a MISB set.
Then this comes along:
Lepin 15002 Cafe Corner
Costs around RMB 240, or US$37.
What? Wow, just wow.
AFAIK, the Town Hall (Lepin 15003), the Brick Bank (Lepin 15001) and the Firehouse Headquarters (Lepin 16001) are also available. The latter two are current 2016 Lego sets.
Is it legal? I don't know. But it is sure to disrupt both TLG and the secondary market. The GBHQ costs US$349.99. The Lepin version costs just RMB 430 (US$66).
I am quite certain we will see the Green Grocer at some point. It costs US$149.99 new and is priced around US$1,000 now. The pent-up demand for it will be unbelievable. The secondary market may just crater.
Classy gel pens
The Pilot G-Tec-C4 pens are kind of hard to find in Singapore. It is not that popular, likely due to its price (~S$2.80), but pen connoisseurs will appreciate its quality.
The ink writes thin line without spreading, is of deep color, flows smoothly, drys instantly and resists smearing. The con is that the ball point tip is very fragile. Drop the pen on its tip and you will kiss the pen good-bye.
It is available on Amazon in pack of 10 assorted colors for US$20.05. The colors are: purple, pink, red, orange, brown, green, light blue, blue, navy blue and black. I've always wanted the full spectrum of colors. :-D
There is also a pack of the 5 more common colors: black, red, blue, green and purple.
Amazon UK sells a slightly different 10-pack, with yellow instead of navy blue. It looks prettier, but is less useful because yellow is too light on white paper.
Pay unfairly to be fair
News: Inside Google’s policy to 'pay unfairly' — why 2 people in the same role can earn dramatically different amounts
In the years following its 2004 IPO, Google needed a way to continue its impressive growth without losing its best people to hot startups like Facebook and Twitter.
Laszlo Bock, who became the SVP of Google's People Operations in 2006, writes in his new book "Work Rules!" that he and Google's leadership spent years determining how to keep the retention rate of top talent as high as possible.
They decided on a counter-intuitive strategy: to "pay unfairly."
As Bock writes (our bold):
At Google, we ... have situations where two people doing the same work can have a hundred times difference in their impact, and in their rewards.
For example, there have been situations where one person received a stock award of $10,000, and another working in the same area received $1,000,000. This isn't the norm, but the range of rewards at almost any level can easily vary by 300% to 500%, and even then there is plenty of room for outliers.
In fact, we have many cases where people at more "junior" levels make far more than average performers at more "senior" levels. It's a natural result of having greater impact, and a compensation system that recognizes that impact.
Bock admits that a policy to "pay unfairly" is provocative, and that it might be better characterized as "pay unequally." In his view, it is actually more fair to pay a top performer significantly more than an employee with the same job title that produces less value.
To follow his logic, you might think of a company like a baseball team. The Detroit Tigers, for instance, pay Justin Verlander $28 million because he's a Cy Young Award-winning pitcher that they don't want to see on the roster of another team.
Bock writes that even though Google prides itself on hiring only elite performers, its employees fall into a power law distribution (as opposed to a bell curve), in which the large majority of employees are "below average" and its few top performers bring up the average.
He cites a 2012 report from Longwood University's Ernest O'Boyle and Indiana University's Herman Aguinis that analyzed human performance across various fields, from academia to professional sports. For example, a normal distribution model (in which the median is the average) predicted the number of artists with more than 10 Grammy nominations would be five. In reality, it was 64.
They found that a power law distribution vs. a normal distribution fit almost every field they studied.
"Ten percent of productivity comes from the top percentile, and 26% of output derives from the top 5% of workers," O'Boyle and Aguinis write.
As Bock notes, this means that "the top 1% of workers generated 10 times the average output, and the top 5% more than four times the average."
The exceptions to this observation, O'Boyle and Aguinis explain, include "industries and organizations that rely on manual labor, have limited technology, and place strict standards for both minimum and maximum production" — essentially anywhere there's little opportunity to be exceptional.
Bock says managers at any company should ask, "How many people would you trade for your very best performer? If the number is more than five, you're probably underpaying your best person. And if it's more than ten, you're almost certainly underpaying."
Silicon Valley companies are notorious for fighting over top talent. Earlier this year, Google, Apple, Intel, and Adobe paid $415 million to settle a lawsuit that accused them of entering an illegal anti-poaching agreement that allegedly was meant to keep a level of peace.
Google has emerged as a leader in the war for talent. With its billions of dollars in revenues, it can afford to pay huge sums to retain those it deems most valuable.
As former Google director of product management and current venture capitalist Hunter Walk told Business Insider's Nicholas Carlson, "The worst way to recruit from Google is with money. For anyone really good, Google will outbid you. So you're left with the ones they don't want to retain."
Bock acknowledges that Google has more cash to play with than most companies, but argues that rewarding your company's elite much more than everyone else is smart management for any highly competitive business.
"It's hard work to have pay ranges where someone can make two or even 10 times more than someone else," he writes. "But it's much harder to watch your highest-potential and best people walk out the door. It makes you wonder which companies are really paying unfairly: the ones where the best people make far more than average, or the ones where everyone is paid the same."
I'm surprised at two points he brought up:
- we have many cases where people at more "junior" levels make far more than average performers at more "senior" levels.
- even though Google prides itself on hiring only elite performers, its employees fall into a power law distribution (as opposed to a bell curve), in which the large majority of employees are "below average" and its few top performers bring up the average.
Point 1 is good for flat organizations. No resting on one's laurels. But I believe even for Google, this is done using stock awards. Regular pay still follows the hierarchical structure.
Point 2 is interesting. Either Google's standard is very high, or that their interviews are sufficiently "gamed" that they allow in a specific group of people... who are good at acing the interviews.
The BB by-election
| May 7 | 2015 GE | |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 25,727 | 27,077 |
| Rejected | 622 | 545 |
| Non-voters | 1,535 | 1,593 |
| PAP | 61.21% | 73.02% |
| SDP | 38.79% | 26.36% |
At first glance, Dr Chee did well. But consider this: this is the first by-election PAP won in 37 years.
Truth be told, the West has always been supportive of PAP, so it would have been a tough fight. But it was made tougher by CSJ's poor reputation; mistakes that he made more than twenty years ago and continue to haunt him today.
Dr Chee made a fatal mistake in ousting Chiam See Tong from SDP in 1993. Now, he did not really do so — CST resigned when the SDP CEC (Central Executive Committee) did not want to censure against CSJ over his hunger strike, and he went to the press — but that is water under the bridge.
What was reported: CSJ ousted CST in a power-play. At that time — even now — people have great "affection" for CST because he was one of the few (if not the only one) opposition MPs. People assumed that he must be a leader and doing something right. And CSJ was hungry for his position. People bought it, hook, line and sinker. In the pre-Internet era, there was no way for CSJ to reach out to the public to give his side of the story.
In this by-election, the Chiams came out to attack Dr Chee, playing right into PAP's hand. Good job, Mrs Chiam.
Looking at CST's MP role, my assessment of him is Liu Biao. He just wants to guard that piece of land (Poton Pasir) that "belongs" to him and leave a "legend", it being his good name. And of course, he must be the leader, because he has the "mandate of the people".
PAP did not consider him a threat at all.
Cars are now more affordable!
MAS eases motor vehicle financing: maximum LTV (Loan-to-Value) is increased by 10% and tenure is increased by 2 years.
Previously, for a car with OMV up to $20k, one can loan up to 60% for 5 years. Now it is 70% for 7 years. Cars are now more affordable! :lol:
This is a brilliant move.
First, it helps banks secure more business. It is a given that loan restrictions are loosened in bad times, with the motive of helping financial institutions. If times are really bad, 100% loans will come back.
Second, it increases demand for cars, hence keeping COE in the $40k-ish region. This ensures a steady revenue and enforces the car-lite vision: if you want a car, you have to pay for it.
But the most important part of the announcement is that non-MAS regulated financial entities and licensed moneylenders have to comply with the restrictions as well. No more 80% financing loophole. (It does not stop sellers from over-valuing a car, though, but that is already against the law.)
How about financial prudence? Well, that is really up to oneself. If you determine affordability by monthly installment, that is already the wrong approach, especially if you are paying for the item over its effective life-span. That is the same as renting.
At the end of the day, the important question is, will COE still drop? I still think so. COE was in the $10-15k region ten years ago. How many of these owners can, or are willing, to pay an extra $30k for COE today?
However, I'm proven wrong every time. :lol: This shows that people are willing to pay an extra $250/month to drive. Broken down this way, it does not look like much, isn't it?
High-end LEGO sets
If we set an arbitrary cut-off at US$119.99, we can clearly see that there are more and more high-end LEGO sets in recent years.
(Mindstorms and Technic sets are excluded.)
2016
| $399.99 | 71040 | Disney World Cinderella Castle |
| $349.99 | 75827 | Firehouse Headquarters |
| $269.99 | 76052 | Batman Classic TV Series - Batcave |
| $249.99 | 10253 | Big Ben |
| 75098 | Assault on Hoth | |
| $199.99 | 21128 | The Village |
| $169.99 | 10251 | Brick Bank |
| $119.99 | 60124 | Volcano Exploration Base |
| 70323 | Jestro's Volcano Lair | |
| 70595 | Ultra Stealth Raider | |
| 70596 | Samurai X Cave Chaos | |
| 75157 | Captain Rex's AT-TE |
The list is up to mid-year only.
2015
| $349.99 | 76042 | SHIELD Helicarrier |
| $199.99 | 10247 | Ferris Wheel |
| 60098 | Heavy-Haul Train | |
| 70751 | Temple of Airjitzu | |
| 71016 | Kwik-E-Mart | |
| 75060 | Slave I | |
| 75095 | TIE Fighter | |
| $189.99 | 60097 | City Square |
| $169.99 | 10246 | Detective's Office |
| $149.99 | 75105 | Millennium Falcon |
| 5004816 | Super Heroes DC Collection | |
| $129.99 | 41101 | Heartlake Grand Hotel |
| 75106 | Imperial Assault Carrier | |
| 75919 | Indominus Rex Breakout | |
| $119.99 | 60080 | Spaceport |
| 60095 | Deep Sea Exploration Vessel | |
| 70738 | Final Flight of Destiny's Bounty | |
| 75104 | Kylo Ren's Command Shuttle | |
| 76035 | Jokerland |
2014
| $299.99 | 75059 | Sandcrawler |
| $249.99 | 70810 | MetalBeard's Sea Cow |
| $199.99 | 60052 | Cargo Train |
| 71006 | The Simpsons House | |
| 76023 | The Tumbler | |
| $159.99 | 10243 | Parisian Restaurant |
| $149.99 | 10241 | Maersk Line Triple-E |
| 10244 | Fairground Mixer | |
| 60051 | High-Speed Passenger Train | |
| $129.99 | 60062 | Arctic Icebreaker |
| 75055 | Imperial Star Destroyer | |
| 79018 | The Lonely Mountain | |
| $119.99 | 70146 | Flying Phoenix Fire Temple |
| 70728 | Battle for Ninjago City | |
| 21118 | The Mine |
2013
| $319.99 | 10234 | Sydney Opera House |
| $249.99 | 10236 | Ewok Village |
| $199.99 | 10237 | Tower of Orthanc |
| 10240 | Red Five X-wing Starfighter | |
| $159.99 | 10937 | Batman: Arkham Asylum Breakout |
| 21050 | Architecture Studio | |
| $149.99 | 10232 | Palace Cinema |
| $129.99 | 10233 | Horizon Express |
| 21017 | Imperial Hotel | |
| $119.99 | 60026 | Town Square |
| 70010 | The Lion CHI Temple | |
| 75020 | Jabba's Sail Barge | |
| 75021 | Republic Gunship |
2012
| $199.99 | 10224 | Town Hall |
| 10227 | B-Wing Starfighter | |
| $179.99 | 10225 | R2-D2 |
| 10228 | Haunted House | |
| $129.99 | 9474 | The Battle Of Helm's Deep |
| $119.99 | 4207 | City Garage |
| 9450 | Epic Dragon Battle | |
| 9515 | Malevolence | |
| 9516 | Jabba's Palace | |
| 10223 | Kingdoms Joust |
2011
| $399.99 | 10221 | Super Star Destroyer |
| $199.99 | 21010 | Robie House |
| $159.99 | 3677 | Red Cargo Train |
| $149.99 | 10217 | Diagon Alley |
| 10218 | Pet Shop | |
| $139.99 | 7965 | Millennium Falcon |
| $119.99 | 2507 | Fire Temple |
| 4195 | Queen Anne's Revenge | |
| 7964 | Republic Frigate | |
| 10219 | Maersk Train | |
| 10220 | Volkswagen T1 Camper Van |
2010
| $259.99 | 10212 | Imperial Shuttle |
| $239.99 | 10214 | Tower Bridge |
| $179.99 | 7939 | Cargo Train |
| 10210 | Imperial Flagship | |
| $149.99 | 10211 | Grand Emporium |
| $129.99 | 4842 | Hogwarts Castle |
| 7938 | Passenger Train | |
| $119.99 | 8098 | Clone Turbo Tank |
| 10155 | Maersk Line Container Ship |
2009
| $249.99 | 10195 | Republic Dropship with AT-OT Walker |
| 10196 | Grand Carousel | |
| $149.99 | 10197 | Fire Brigade |
| 10198 | Tantive IV | |
| $130.00 | 9580 | WeDo Construction Set |
| $119.99 | 8039 | Venator-Class Republic Attack Cruiser |
2008
| $399.99 | 10188 | Death Star |
| $299.99 | 10189 | Taj Mahal |
| $199.99 | 852293 | Castle Giant Chess Set |
| $149.99 | 10184 | Town Plan |
| 10185 | Green Grocer | |
| $119.99 | 5609 | Deluxe Train Set |
| 7676 | Republic Attack Gunship | |
| 10187 | Volkswagen Beetle |
Inflation is one reason, but I think a bigger reason is that TLG is recognizing people are willing to pay a lot more for Lego, as evidenced by the after-market prices. The higher price-point brings with it larger and more detailed sets. And less money left to buy discontinued sets. Win-win for TLG!
Handful of Lego survivors
For some reason, TLG kept these sets longer than the normal 2-year shelf life.
| Date | Set # | Name | Pieces | Price (US$) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013/3 | 10232 | Palace Cinema | 2,196 | $149.99 |
| 2013/9 | 10234 | Sydney Opera House | 2,989 | $319.99 |
| 2013/9 | 10236 | Ewok Village | 1,990 | $249.99 |
| 2011/5 | 10218 | Pet Shop | 2,032 | $149.99 |
| 2011/9 | 10220 | Volkswagen T1 Camper Van | 1,332 | $119.99 |
| 2010/10 | 10214 | Tower Bridge | 4,287 | $239.99 |
(The Modular sets are expected.)
Woe to the ones who stocked up on Tower Bridge in 2012.
Potential sets that could follow the trend:
| Date | Set # | Name | Pieces | Price (US$) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015/6 | 10247 | Ferris Wheel | 2,464 | $199.99 | |
| 2015/5 | 75095 | TIE Fighter | 1,685 | $199.99 | |
| 2015/5 | 71016 | Kwik-E-Mart | 2,179 | $199.99 | |
| 2015/3 | 76042 | SHIELD Helicarrier | 2,996 | $349.99 | |
| 2015/1 | 10246 | Detective's Office | 2,262 | $159.99 | |
| 2014/8 | 75059 | Sandcrawler | 3,296 | $299.99 | |
| 2014/8 | 10242 | Mini Cooper MK VII | 1,077 | $99.99 | |
| 2014/6 | 10244 | Fairground Mixer | 1,746 | $149.99 | |
| 2014/2 | 71006 | The Simpsons House | 2,523 | $199.99 | |
| 2014/1 | 10243 | Parisian Restaurant | 2,469 | $159.99 |
My hypothesis is that, since 2012, TLG keeps an Exclusive set around if there is sufficient demand to justify its production. This is why the Town Hall was discontinued after a mere two years even though it was a Modular set.
TLG vs resellers
I gave my reasoning why Lego was not a good investment in April 2013:
- There is now tremendous speculation for retired sets
- The Lego Group (TLG) has wised up and extends shelf-life of popular sets
- People have also wised up and try to get sets before they retire!
- Newer sets are often better and more desirable
These have not slowed speculation one bit, but the landscape has changed.
There is less discount. Gone are the days of 50% off. 30% off is the max (except for poor selling sets) and these are rare.
Exclusive sets now sell at full-price all year round (since July 2013). These are usually the bigger sets that are not sold through mass-market retailers. Say goodbye to US$120 Modular buildings and hello US$170 (the new regular price). This reduces demand, but also spread the sales throughout the year.
Prices have increased by around 10%.
TLG has increased the max price-point to US$350 (except for UCS), allowing for more detailed and elaborate sets.
There has been an explosion of themes and sets. One is hardpressed to collect the current sets, much less the discontinued ones.
Most sets still have 2-years shelf life, but Modulars are now at least 4 years. As usual, poor-selling ones are ended early. Some bigger exclusive sets have a longer lifespan too. TLG now has the capability to do a small run periodically, keeping them in stock.
The bottom has not fallen out of the reseller market yet, but it could in the next 1-2 years.
Avengers Helicarrier
The Carrier
The Avengers SHIELD Helicarrier (76042) is an impressive set, although it better be, at US$349.99. It has 2,996 pieces.
It opens up to reveal the bridge.
Interior
To top it off:
Eagle Stand
Sadly, this is one set I will not own for three reasons:
- too expensive
- does not seem to be available on Amazon
- low on my priority list
Headphone comparison
| Freq Resp | Impedence | Sensitivity | THD | Driver | Power | Cable | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sennheiser HD 219 | 19 - 21 kHz | 16 ohm | 108 dB | 0.5% | 45 mm | ? | 1.4 m |
| Sennheiser HD 439 | 17 - 22.5 kHz | 32 ohm | 112 dB | 0.1% | 40 mm | ? | 1.4 m |
| Sonic Gear Earpump Studio Pro | 20 - 20 kHz | 32 ohm | 105+/-3 dB | ? | 50 mm | 20 mW | 1.2 m |
The Sennheiser HD 219 was my first "expensive" headphone (at S$79). Finally, I was convinced good headphones make a difference. It seems to accentuate the treble.
The Sennheiser HD 439 seems pretty flat and unremarkable. I don't know if it requires burn-in. It can take a while to get used to, but I like its "unpunchy-ness" — to be able to listen to the music without any added "interpretation" from the headphone. :lol:
The Sonic Gear Earpump Studio Pro seems pretty good for its price (S$40). It sounds good enough for me. This convinced me that headphones don't have to cost a lot to be good. It is a little louder than the other two.
As a rule, I prefer over-the-ear headphones for their natural noise isolation. I also think it is easier to have better sound with bigger drivers. :lol:
A new headphone at 40% off!
I was browsing headphones on Amazon when I saw the Sennheiser HD 439 headphones at US$39.95! Wow, Challenger sells it for S$122.55 (after 5% off)!
It is a no-brainer at this price.
Except it was not all plain sailing to buy it. Amazon did not ship this overseas, so I had to go through a forwarder, 65daigou.
Next, Amazon charged shipping of US$6.75. Shipping is free to Singapore but not locally? Hmm...
The headphone weighed a mere 400 grams, but was 670 grams with the packaging. However, Amazon used an oversized box that had a volumetric weight of 2.3 kg. 65daigou rounded it to 2.5 kg and charged S$22.50 for it!
For US, 65daigou offers free repacking service, but you need to opt for it upfront, which I did not. I emailed them and they grudging did it as a one-time exception.
So, it was repacked to 440 grams (by throwing the box away) with volumetric weight of 740 grams. It was rounded to 810 grams (10% more), and costed S$7.98. I paid immediately.
Total cost: S$75.52 (S$67.54 [US$46.70] + S$7.98). That's 40% off local price!
Raspberry Pi SD Card Extreme
The search for the "best" SD card, after reading Jeff Geerling's microSD Card Benchmarks page.
| S$ | Rated | Read | Write | Rnd R | Rnd W | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SanDisk Extreme 32 GB | $32 | 90 | 21.87 | 21.9 | 9.42 | 2.36 |
| SanDisk Ultra 32 GB | $19 | 80 | 21.66 | 15.4 | 6.45 | 1.00 |
| SanDisk Ultra 32 GB* | $17 | 48 | 20.79 | 7.9 | 5.98 | 1.57 |
*Results from Jeff Geerling's microSD Card Benchmarks page. I presume he tested this card.
All figures in MB/s. Ran on Raspberry Pi 3, which is severely I/O limited. It still does not take advantage of UHS SD cards (requires 1.8V for I/O), although it can be overclocked to 100 MHz to do so.
There is no doubt the SanDisk Extreme is one of the best card for Raspberry Pi 3, but how about the Ultra, at almost half the price?
Result: the new Ultra card trades random writes for faster throughput.
The SD cards are substantially cheaper on Amazon. The SanDisk Extreme 32 GB is US$16.29, or S$22.64 (at US$1-to-S$1.39).
Kill, or to be killed
Attack on Titan has a rather decent story, so I thought of buying the manga. It has two strikes against it: it is still in progress and it is pretty violent — although it is a far cry from Berserk.
I saw the current set of volumes 1 to 18 in Kinokuniya in JEM. To buy or not to buy? In the end, I decided not to buy because I thought I could look for them in Taiwan first. They should be readily available over there, right? :lol: Unfortunately, I did not come anywhere near a comic store in Taiwan.
Also, I pondered on it for so long that I had very little time to shop for a jacket for my trip, so I left empty-handed. You know how that went. It is the butterfly effect.
It turned out just as well, because in a few days time, I decided the manga was too humourless and violent, and found a lighter manga: Assassination Classroom.
The students of class 3-E have been tasked to kill their "alien" teacher, who has destroyed 75% of the Moon and has issued an ultimatum to destroy Earth in a year's time, unless he is killed first. The reward for doing so? 10 billion yen, or S$121 million! (They are saving Earth, after all.)
The manga just concluded on 16/3 with 180 chapters. Overall, I rate it a B+.
Only 17 volumes (up to chapter 150) have been released in Chinese. There should be a total of 20 volumes.
Each book is NT$100 (S$4.30), but Kinokuniya sells them at ~S$7.10 (65% more). 20% off = S$5.68 (not that I qualify for it). This is why people avoid buying from retail shops, then the shops are not able to survive — a vicious cycle. Costs in Singapore are simply too high.
I got 16 volumes, since one volume was out-of-stock. They weigh 2.8 kg. Books are heavy. I would have a hard time lugging them back from Taiwan! :-D
Why not Attack on Titan?
I have strict criteria when buying manga. One of the reasons is that I have limited shelf space.
First, it helps to be completed. If it is arc-based, then I will evaluate it up to the last completed arc. Mangas have a tendency to drag out for years, especially if the author loses interest or inspiration. Or it goes in a direction that I do not like, but I still feel compelled to complete it.
Second, I prefer lighter stories with humour. I cannot take too much of blood, gore and death. For fighting series, I'm often wary because fight scenes can drag on for too long. I want the story to progress. Attack on Titan has zero humour and is pretty violent. People die left and right, but as the story progresses, it is obvious some protagonists are exempted from this rule — the cliffhanger effect is reduced if you know they are "immortal".
This is one way authors paint themselves into a corner: the protagonists grow so strong that there are no challenges left. This is handled pretty well in Assassination Classroom, even though by midpoint the students have become world-class assassins and are virtually unstoppable. You have to read it to find out. ;-)
I like mysteries and puzzles. In Attack on Titan, the author slowly reveals the world to the readers. He has revealed much of how the walled cities and the Titans work, but the outer regions are still mysterious. I wonder how long more can the author stretch it — perhaps another 10 volumes or so? :lol:
Last of all is cost. If each volume is S$4.30, I won't mind buying it. But at S$7.10? I have to be more selective.
The most expensive city in the world
Earlier this month, this country was for the third year in a row ranked the most expensive city in the world for expats. While many say that with budgeting, living here is quite affordable, some have found that trying to emulate their life back home can get costly.
News: US couple learn to find ways to adjust to life here
When corporate pilot Cyril Letzelter gets the chance to fly to the United States every three months, he stocks up on clothes for himself, his wife and his two children.
"Children's clothing at a Walmart in the US can cost US$3 (S$4.10) a piece but in Singapore, it's at least US$15," said the 48-year-old American, who is not surprised that Singapore has been found the most expensive city in the world for expatriates. He moved here in November 2013 with his wife Jennifer, a 35-year-old engineer.
They have two young daughters who are three months and 23 months old. Their maid is paid $1,000 a month.
Said Mr Letzelter: "We're adventurous people and we were looking for a place to raise kids that could provide them with a unique culture.
"The pay was good and the math worked out well."
The couple earn about $29,000 together, but even then, it meant making adjustments to their lifestyle.
Mr Letzelter's previous house near Denver, Colorado was 610 sq m, while his wife had a house near Boston that was about half of that size. Now, their apartment in Thomson is about 150 sq m.
Mr Letzelter said: "Housing is crazy expensive here. We're paying $4,400 in rent.
"For that amount, we can get two cars and a very big house in the US."
They have also chosen not to buy a car despite owning two in the US.
Having bought their cars at about US$20,000 each there, they baulk at having to pay at least $80,000 here. But they like the relatively cheap public transport here.
Mrs Letzelter said: "Taxis are very cheap and public transportation is amazing. In other countries, we would have to have a car, but here, we have no problems."
While they can adjust to a smaller home and public transport, getting used to local food has been a lot harder, so they pay extra for imported foodstuffs.
At $2,400 a month, their grocery bill here is triple what they usually spend in the US.
Mrs Letzelter said: "Grocery shopping is shockingly expensive. We try to shop at FairPrice because it's cheaper, but oftentimes we pay a lot of extra money to get products that make us comfortable."
While the family had initially planned to live here for a decade, they have recently started to contemplate a move back to the US.
Mr Letzelter has noticed a significant attempt by the Singapore Government and firms to hire more locals rather than expats since 2014.
"Far fewer expats are getting expat contracts, with many getting only local contracts, and the salaries are not as high," he said.
His wife was only able to find work as an engineer on a local contract. She said she felt compelled to work as the high cost of living here meant that the couple could not meet their financial goals - saving for retirement and their children's college funds - just on Mr Letzelter's salary alone.
The couple said other American expats are thinking of moving out or have already done so.
Mrs Letzelter, a member of the American Women's Association of Singapore, said the association used to have significantly more members. The improving US economy and a strengthening US dollar also make it tougher to stay here.
When Mr Letzelter first joined his company here in 2013, he was getting paid about 40 per cent more than he was in the US. But this has since narrowed to 20 per cent.
He said: "We really do like it here, but if the math doesn't work out, we'll go back earlier," he said.
THE LETZELTERS' AVERAGE MONTHLY EXPENSES
| RENT | $4,400 |
| GROCERIES | $2,400 |
| PUBLIC TRANSPORT AND TAXIS | $800 |
| EATING OUT | $500 |
| EDUCATION | $1,000 |
| HELPER | $1,000 |
| UTILITIES | $350 |
| ENTERTAINMENT | $200 |
| TOTAL | $10,650 |
*Also spends $15,000 a year for travel back to the US.
The takeaway
At first, I wondered why Straits Times ran this story. Then I realized they must be trying to show why being the most expensive city for expats does not mean the same for locals.
That is true, but the cost of living is still pretty high. And there is no easy way to lower it — there is no countryside where you can just live off the land. Let me present a hypothetical "localized" expenses for a family of three:
| HOUSING* | $600 |
| GROCERIES | $300 |
| PUBLIC TRANSPORT AND TAXIS | $150 |
| EATING OUT | $150 |
| EDUCATION | $50 |
| HELPER | $500 |
| UTILITIES | $100 |
| ENTERTAINMENT | $150 |
| TOTAL | $2,000 |
*This is in addition to using CPF for mortgage payment.
That is still a lot of money.
Anyway, I found it somewhat amusing that the couple balk at (i) buying a car because they find it too expensive, and (ii) that Mrs Letzelters felt compelled to work to supplement the family income. Assuming Mr Letzelters earns $24k/month, he is in the 95.9% percentile (2014 resident taxpayers). Ladies and Gentlemen, pause for a bit and let that sink in.
Note: updated localized expenses from feedback.